Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
12/17/92 GHW Bush signs NAFTA
In one of the last acts of his presidency, George HW Bush signed NAFTA after a year and a half of negotiations with Canada's Brian Mulroney and Carlos DeGortari of Mexico. It was the crowning achievement of a process that began in 1991.
[img]
[/img]
Republicans have bashed democrats for years for the lopsided trade agreement that they themselves fought so hard for. Even in 2016, Trump connected Hillary with the pact to associate democrats with outsourcing and job loss. People should ask: "Does it sound like something pro-union democrats would come up with?". This is how they rewrite history.
[img]
[/img]
Bill Clinton did eventually sign it after changes to health and human rights issues and not allowing Mexican truck drivers free travel in the US. At the time, Trent Lott complained that Clinton took all the teeth out of a great trade agreement.
I. NAFTA Is Signed into Law
On December 17, 1992, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari, and U. S. President George Bush signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), marking the end of a process that began on February 5, 1991, when the three leaders announced they would negotiate the trade accord. Following approval by the legislatures in each of the three countries, NAFTA entered into force January 1, 1994. Its implementation created a free-trade area in North America that was the largest of its kind in the world, with a combined 1994 gross domestic product (GDP) of $7.7 trillion and 368 million consumers. The objectives of the trade agreement, as detailed more specifically through its principles and rules, are to
eliminate barriers to trade in, and facilitate the cross-border movement of, goods and services between the territories of the three involved parties.
Link:
http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=2582
On December 17, 1992, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari, and U. S. President George Bush signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), marking the end of a process that began on February 5, 1991, when the three leaders announced they would negotiate the trade accord. Following approval by the legislatures in each of the three countries, NAFTA entered into force January 1, 1994. Its implementation created a free-trade area in North America that was the largest of its kind in the world, with a combined 1994 gross domestic product (GDP) of $7.7 trillion and 368 million consumers. The objectives of the trade agreement, as detailed more specifically through its principles and rules, are to
eliminate barriers to trade in, and facilitate the cross-border movement of, goods and services between the territories of the three involved parties.
Link:
http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=2582
As initially conceived and negotiated, NAFTA included no provisions for labor rights. In 1991, President George Bush told the United States Congress:
Mexico's labor standards are comparable to those in the United States, Europe and other industrialized countries. The Mexican Constitution of 1917, as implemented through various pieces of legislation, provides a comprehensive set of rights and standards for workers in all sectors of Mexico. What have been lacking are budgetary resources to permit effective enforcement of the constitution and legislative measures.35
As Bush pointed out, Mexican law protects a broad array of labor rights. In practice, however, these are not enforced and are routinely flouted by employers in Mexico. Similarly, as a recent Human Rights Watch report shows, problems of weak enforcement of labor law protections for workers' rights are also evident in the United States.36
According to the Bush Administration, the trade agreement would itself generate the economic resources necessary to enable the Mexican government to overcome the technical problem of funding enforcement of the country's labor laws. Yet, in 1991 politics in the United States forced the labor rights issue to the top of the debate on trade. The Bush Administration needed a renewal of fast-track negotiating authority to move forward with the NAFTA trade talks. Such authority would enable the president to negotiate a trade accord that would be submitted to Congress for a straight yes-or-no vote, thereby avoiding a situation in which the president would be required to renegotiate with trading partners those parts of an agreement that Congress wished to change.
Senators and representatives in the U.S. Congress took the opportunity provided by the fast track debate to raise concern about the impact on the United States of inadequate labor standards in Mexico.37 In response, the administration assured them that any trade agreement with Mexico would include "new initiatives to expand U.S.-Mexico labor cooperation," including labor standards.38 Although it was initially unclear what such initiatives would comprise, the Bush Administration subsequently proposed to establish a commission to discuss labor issues arising between Mexico and the United States.39
President Bush signed NAFTA in December 1992, but sending it to the Senate for ratification would be up to the next president. Facing stiff questions from labor unions-a core Democratic Party constituency-candidate Bill Clinton declared that he would support NAFTA if it included side agreements on labor rights and the environment.
In a much-cited speech in 1992, just before the presidential election, Clinton stated that NAFTA, as negotiated, did "nothing to reaffirm our right to insist that the Mexicans follow their own labor standards, now frequently violated." After Clinton's speech, President Carlos Salinas of Mexico expressed his willingness to address concerns beyond the specific trade issues dealt with in the main accord.
Link:
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/nafta/nafta0401-04.htm
Mexico's labor standards are comparable to those in the United States, Europe and other industrialized countries. The Mexican Constitution of 1917, as implemented through various pieces of legislation, provides a comprehensive set of rights and standards for workers in all sectors of Mexico. What have been lacking are budgetary resources to permit effective enforcement of the constitution and legislative measures.35
As Bush pointed out, Mexican law protects a broad array of labor rights. In practice, however, these are not enforced and are routinely flouted by employers in Mexico. Similarly, as a recent Human Rights Watch report shows, problems of weak enforcement of labor law protections for workers' rights are also evident in the United States.36
According to the Bush Administration, the trade agreement would itself generate the economic resources necessary to enable the Mexican government to overcome the technical problem of funding enforcement of the country's labor laws. Yet, in 1991 politics in the United States forced the labor rights issue to the top of the debate on trade. The Bush Administration needed a renewal of fast-track negotiating authority to move forward with the NAFTA trade talks. Such authority would enable the president to negotiate a trade accord that would be submitted to Congress for a straight yes-or-no vote, thereby avoiding a situation in which the president would be required to renegotiate with trading partners those parts of an agreement that Congress wished to change.
Senators and representatives in the U.S. Congress took the opportunity provided by the fast track debate to raise concern about the impact on the United States of inadequate labor standards in Mexico.37 In response, the administration assured them that any trade agreement with Mexico would include "new initiatives to expand U.S.-Mexico labor cooperation," including labor standards.38 Although it was initially unclear what such initiatives would comprise, the Bush Administration subsequently proposed to establish a commission to discuss labor issues arising between Mexico and the United States.39
President Bush signed NAFTA in December 1992, but sending it to the Senate for ratification would be up to the next president. Facing stiff questions from labor unions-a core Democratic Party constituency-candidate Bill Clinton declared that he would support NAFTA if it included side agreements on labor rights and the environment.
In a much-cited speech in 1992, just before the presidential election, Clinton stated that NAFTA, as negotiated, did "nothing to reaffirm our right to insist that the Mexicans follow their own labor standards, now frequently violated." After Clinton's speech, President Carlos Salinas of Mexico expressed his willingness to address concerns beyond the specific trade issues dealt with in the main accord.
Link:
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/nafta/nafta0401-04.htm
April 17 2001
Bush Wants to Expand NAFTA:
In the guise of free trade with Latin and South America, President Bush is preparing to ship more American jobs south of the border in the near future.
Bush is traveling to Quebec this week to promote a plan to create a Western Hemisphere free-trade zone, as well as scheduling meetings earlier with Chile's president, Ricardo Lagos, and with Argentina President Fernando De la Rua on the same subject.
Such a zone would expand NAFTA to include Latin and South America. If Bush has his way, American workers, already reeling from jobs lost to NAFTA, will see more factories close their doors and move south for cheaper labor and to escape the U.S.'s tougher labor laws.
"American workers don't mind competing when the competition is fair," President Ed Hill said, "But the competition must meet the basic standards of worker rights, including freedom of association and the right to bargain."
Bush Wants to Expand NAFTA:
In the guise of free trade with Latin and South America, President Bush is preparing to ship more American jobs south of the border in the near future.
Bush is traveling to Quebec this week to promote a plan to create a Western Hemisphere free-trade zone, as well as scheduling meetings earlier with Chile's president, Ricardo Lagos, and with Argentina President Fernando De la Rua on the same subject.
Such a zone would expand NAFTA to include Latin and South America. If Bush has his way, American workers, already reeling from jobs lost to NAFTA, will see more factories close their doors and move south for cheaper labor and to escape the U.S.'s tougher labor laws.
"American workers don't mind competing when the competition is fair," President Ed Hill said, "But the competition must meet the basic standards of worker rights, including freedom of association and the right to bargain."
21 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
When I see things like: "Or Senator Clinton might want to apologize to the millions of workers in this country who lost their jobs because of the disastrous trade agreements she supported."
